hello Hristo Thank you for taking a look at the program and the output. The detailed explanation was very helpful. I also found out that the signature of a derived datatype is the specific sequence of the primitive datatypes and is independent of the displacements. So the differences in the relative addresses will not cause a problem.
thanks again :) priyesh On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:00 PM, <users-requ...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > Send users mailing list submissions to > us...@open-mpi.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > users-requ...@open-mpi.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > users-ow...@open-mpi.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: issue with addresses (Iliev, Hristo) > 2. Re: Extent of Distributed Array Type? (George Bosilca) > 3. Re: Extent of Distributed Array Type? (Jeff Squyres) > 4. Re: Extent of Distributed Array Type? (Richard Shaw) > 5. Mpi_leave_pinned=1 is thread safe? (tmish...@jcity.maeda.co.jp) > 6. Re: Fortran90 Bindings (Kumar, Sudhir) > 7. Re: Fortran90 Bindings (Damien) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 17:10:33 +0000 > From: "Iliev, Hristo" <il...@rz.rwth-aachen.de> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] issue with addresses > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: <18d6fe2f-7a68-4d1a-94fe-c14058ba4...@rz.rwth-aachen.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi, Priyesh, > > The output of your program is pretty much what one would expect. > 140736841025492 is 0x7FFFD96A87D4 which pretty much corresponds to a > location in the stack, which is to be expected as a and b are scalar > variables and most likely end up on the stack. As c is array its location > is compiler-dependent. Some compilers put small arrays on the stack while > others make them global or allocate them on the heap. In your case 0x6ABAD0 > could either be somewhere in the BSS (where uninitialised global variables > reside) or in the heap, which starts right after BSS (I would say it is the > BSS). If the array is placed in BSS its location is fixed with respect to > the image base. > > Linux by default implements partial Address Space Layout Randomisation > (ASLR) by placing the program stack at slightly different location with > each run (this is to make remote stack based exploits harder). That's why > you see different addresses for variables on the stack. But things in BSS > would pretty much have the same addresses when the code is executed > multiple times or on different machines having the same architecture and > similar OS with similar settings since executable images are still loaded > at the same base virtual address. > > Having different addresses is not an issue for MPI as it only operates > with pointers which are local to the process as well as with relative > offsets. You pass the MPI_Send or MPI_Recv function the address of the data > buffer in the current process and it has nothing to do with where those > buffers are located in the other processes. Note also that MPI supports > heterogeneous computing, e.g. the sending process might be 32-bit and the > receiving one 64-bit. In this scenario it is quite probable that the > addresses will differ by very large margin (e.g. the stack address of your > 64-bit output is not even valid on 32-bit system). > > Hope that helps more :) > > Kind regards, > Hristo > > On 24.07.2012, at 02:02, Priyesh Srivastava wrote: > > > hello Hristo > > > > Thank you for your reply. I was able to understand some parts of your > response, but still had some doubts due to my lack of knowledge about the > way memory is allocated. > > > > I have created a small sample program and the resulting output which > will help me pin point my question. > > The program is : > > > > > > program test > > include'mpif.h' > > > > integer a,b,c(10),ierr,id,datatype,size(3),type(3),i,status > > > > integer(kind=MPI_ADDRESS_KIND) add(3) > > > > > > call MPI_INIT(ierr) > > call MPI_COMM_RANK(MPI_COMM_WORLD,id,ierr) > > call MPI_GET_ADDRESS(a,add(1),ierr) > > write(*,*) 'address of a ,id ', add(1), id > > call MPI_GET_ADDRESS(b,add(2),ierr) > > write(*,*) 'address of b,id ', add(2), id > > call MPI_GET_ADDRESS(c,add(3),ierr) > > write(*,*) 'address of c,id ', add(3), id > > > > add(3)=add(3)-add(1) > > add(2)=add(2)-add(1) > > add(1)=add(1)-add(1) > > > > size(1)=1 > > size(2)=1 > > size(3)=10 > > type(1)=MPI_INTEGER > > type(2)=MPI_INTEGER > > type(3)=MPI_INTEGER > > call MPI_TYPE_CREATE_STRUCT(3,size,add,type,datatype,ierr) > > call MPI_TYPE_COMMIT(datatype,ierr) > > > > write(*,*) 'datatype ,id', datatype , id > > write(*,*) ' relative add1 ',add(1), 'id',id > > write(*,*) ' relative add2 ',add(2), 'id',id > > write(*,*) ' relative add3 ',add(3), 'id',id > > if(id==0) then > > a = 1000 > > b=2000 > > do i=1,10 > > c(i)=i > > end do > > c(10)=700 > > c(1)=600 > > end if > > > > > > if(id==0) then > > call MPI_SEND(a,1,datatype,1,8,MPI_COMM_WORLD,ierr) > > end if > > > > if(id==1) then > > call MPI_RECV(a,1,datatype,0,8,MPI_COMM_WORLD,status,ierr) > > write(*,*) 'id =',id > > write(*,*) 'a=' , a > > write(*,*) 'b=' , b > > do i=1,10 > > write(*,*) 'c(',i,')=',c(i) > > end do > > end if > > > > call MPI_FINALIZE(ierr) > > end > > > > > > > > the output is : > > > > > > address of a ,id 140736841025492 0 > > address of b,id 140736841025496 0 > > address of c,id 6994640 0 > > datatype ,id 58 0 > > relative add1 0 id 0 > > relative add2 4 id 0 > > relative add3 -140736834030852 id 0 > > address of a ,id 140736078234324 1 > > address of b,id 140736078234328 1 > > address of c,id 6994640 1 > > datatype ,id 58 1 > > relative add1 0 id 1 > > relative add2 4 id 1 > > relative add3 -140736071239684 id 1 > > id = 1 > > a= 1000 > > b= 2000 > > c( 1 )= 600 > > c( 2 )= 2 > > c( 3 )= 3 > > c( 4 )= 4 > > c(5 )= 5 > > c( 6 )= 6 > > c( 7 )= 7 > > c( 8 )= 8 > > c(9 )= 9 > > c(10 )= 700 > > > > > > > > As I had mentioned that the smaller address(of array c) is same for both > the processors. However the larger ones(of 'a' and 'b' ) are different. > This gets explained by what you had mentioned. > > > > So the relative address of the array 'c ' with respect to 'a' is > different for both the processors . The way I am passing data should not > work(specifically the passing of array 'c') but still everything is > correctly sent from processor 0 to 1. I have noticed that this way of > sending non contiguous data is common but I am confused why this works. > > > > thanks > > priyesh > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM, <users-requ...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > > Send users mailing list submissions to > > us...@open-mpi.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > users-requ...@open-mpi.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > users-ow...@open-mpi.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of users digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Efficient polling for both incoming messages and request > > completion (Geoffrey Irving) > > 2. checkpoint problem (=?gb2312?B?s8LLyQ==?=) > > 3. Re: checkpoint problem (Reuti) > > 4. Re: Re :Re: OpenMP and OpenMPI Issue (Paul Kapinos) > > 5. Re: issue with addresses (Iliev, Hristo) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 15:01:09 -0700 > > From: Geoffrey Irving <irv...@naml.us> > > Subject: [OMPI users] Efficient polling for both incoming messages and > > request completion > > To: users <us...@open-mpi.org> > > Message-ID: > > <CAJ1ofpdNxSVD=_ > ffn1j3kn9ktzjgjehb0xjf3eyl76ajwvd...@mail.gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > > Hello, > > > > Is it possible to efficiently poll for both incoming messages and > > request completion using only one thread? As far as I know, busy > > waiting with alternate MPI_Iprobe and MPI_Testsome calls is the only > > way to do this. Is that approach dangerous to do performance-wise? > > > > Background: my application is memory constrained, so when requests > > complete I may suddenly be able to schedule new computation. At the > > same time, I need to be responding to a variety of asynchronous > > messages from unknown processors with unknown message sizes, which as > > far as I know I can't turn into a request to poll on. > > > > Thanks, > > Geoffrey > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:02:03 +0800 > > From: "=?gb2312?B?s8LLyQ==?=" <chens...@nscc-tj.gov.cn> > > Subject: [OMPI users] checkpoint problem > > To: "Open MPI Users" <us...@open-mpi.org> > > Message-ID: <4b55b3e5fc79bad3009c21962e848...@nscc-tj.gov.cn> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" > > > > Hi all,How can I create ckpt files regularly? I mean, do > checkpoint every 100 seconds. Is there any options to do this? Or I have to > write a script myself?THANKS,---------------CHEN SongR&D > DepartmentNational Supercomputer Center in TianjinBinhai New Area, Tianjin, > China > > -------------- next part -------------- > > HTML attachment scrubbed and removed > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 12:15:49 +0200 > > From: Reuti <re...@staff.uni-marburg.de> > > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] checkpoint problem > > To: ?? <chens...@nscc-tj.gov.cn>, Open MPI Users < > us...@open-mpi.org> > > Message-ID: > > <623c01f7-8d8c-4dcf-aa47-2c3eded28...@staff.uni-marburg.de> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 > > > > Am 23.07.2012 um 10:02 schrieb ????: > > > > > How can I create ckpt files regularly? I mean, do checkpoint every 100 > seconds. Is there any options to do this? Or I have to write a script > myself? > > > > Yes, or use a queuing system which supports creation of a checkpoint in > fixed time intervals. > > > > -- Reuti > > > > > > > THANKS, > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------- > > > CHEN Song > > > R&D Department > > > National Supercomputer Center in Tianjin > > > Binhai New Area, Tianjin, China > > > _______________________________________________ > > > users mailing list > > > us...@open-mpi.org > > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 12:26:24 +0200 > > From: Paul Kapinos <kapi...@rz.rwth-aachen.de> > > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Re :Re: OpenMP and OpenMPI Issue > > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > > Message-ID: <500d26d0.4070...@rz.rwth-aachen.de> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" > > > > Jack, > > note that support for THREAD_MULTIPLE is available in [newer] versions > of open > > MPI, but disabled by default. You have to enable it by configuring, in > 1.6: > > > > --enable-mpi-thread-multiple > > Enable MPI_THREAD_MULTIPLE support (default: > > disabled) > > > > You may check the available threading supprt level by using the attaches > program. > > > > > > On 07/20/12 19:33, Jack Galloway wrote: > > > This is an old thread, and I'm curious if there is support now for > this? I have > > > a large code that I'm running, a hybrid MPI/OpenMP code, that is > having trouble > > > over our infiniband network. I'm running a fairly large problem (uses > about > > > 18GB), and part way in, I get the following errors: > > > > You say "big footprint"? I hear a bell ringing... > > http://www.open-mpi.org/faq/?category=openfabrics#ib-low-reg-mem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Dipl.-Inform. Paul Kapinos - High Performance Computing, > > RWTH Aachen University, Center for Computing and Communication > > Seffenter Weg 23, D 52074 Aachen (Germany) > > Tel: +49 241/80-24915 > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: mpi_threading_support.f > > Type: text/x-fortran > > Size: 411 bytes > > Desc: not available > > URL: < > http://www.open-mpi.org/MailArchives/users/attachments/20120723/1f30ae61/attachment.bin > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: smime.p7s > > Type: application/pkcs7-signature > > Size: 4471 bytes > > Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature > > URL: < > http://www.open-mpi.org/MailArchives/users/attachments/20120723/1f30ae61/attachment-0001.bin > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 5 > > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:18:32 +0000 > > From: "Iliev, Hristo" <il...@rz.rwth-aachen.de> > > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] issue with addresses > > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > > Message-ID: > > < > fdaa43115faf4a4f88865097fc2c3cc9030e2...@rz-mbx2.win.rz.rwth-aachen.de> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Hello, > > > > Placement of data in memory is highly implementation dependent. I assume > you > > are running on Linux. This OS? libc (glibc) provides two different > methods > > for dynamic allocation of memory ? heap allocation and anonymous > mappings. > > Heap allocation is used for small data up to MMAP_TRESHOLD bytes in > length > > (128 KiB by default, controllable by calls to ?mallopt(3)?). Such > > allocations end up at predictable memory addresses as long as all > processes > > in your MPI job allocate memory following exactly the same pattern. For > > larger memory blocks malloc() uses private anonymous mappings which might > > end at different locations in the virtual address space depending on how > it > > is being used. > > > > What this has to do with your Fortran code? Fortran runtimes use malloc() > > behind the scenes to allocate automatic heap arrays as well as > ALLOCATABLE > > ones. Small arrays are allocated on the stack usually and will mostly > have > > the same addresses unless some stack placement randomisation is in > effect. > > > > Hope that helps. > > > > Kind regards, > > Hristo > > > > > From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] > On > > Behalf Of Priyesh Srivastava > > > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 10:00 PM > > > To: us...@open-mpi.org > > > Subject: [OMPI users] issue with addresses > > > > > > Hello? > > > > > > I am working on a mpi program. I have been printing?the?addresses of > > different variables and arrays using the MPI_GET_ADDRESS command. What I > > have > noticed is that all the processors are giving the same address of > a > > particular variable as long as the address is less than 2 GB size. When > the > > address of a > variable/ array?is?more than 2GB size different processors > > are giving different addresses for the same variable. (I am working on a > 64 > > bit system and am using > the new MPI Functions and MPI_ADDRESS_KIND > > integers for getting?the?addresses). > > > > > > my question is that should?all?the processors give the same address for > > same variables? If so then why is this not happening for variables with > > larger addresses. > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > priyesh > > > > -- > > Hristo Iliev, Ph.D. -- High Performance Computing > > RWTH Aachen University, Center for Computing and Communication > > Rechen- und Kommunikationszentrum der RWTH Aachen > > Seffenter Weg 23, D 52074 Aachen (Germany) > > Tel: +49 241 80 24367 -- Fax/UMS: +49 241 80 624367 > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: smime.p7s > > Type: application/pkcs7-signature > > Size: 5494 bytes > > Desc: not available > > URL: < > http://www.open-mpi.org/MailArchives/users/attachments/20120723/abceb9c3/attachment.bin > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > End of users Digest, Vol 2304, Issue 1 > > ************************************** > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > -- > Hristo Iliev, Ph.D. -- High Performance Computing, > RWTH Aachen University, Center for Computing and Communication > Seffenter Weg 23, D 52074 Aachen (Germany) > Tel: +49 241 80 24367 -- Fax/UMS: +49 241 80 624367 > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: smime.p7s > Type: application/pkcs7-signature > Size: 4389 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://www.open-mpi.org/MailArchives/users/attachments/20120724/b8c0b538/attachment.bin > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 00:28:19 +0200 > From: George Bosilca <bosi...@eecs.utk.edu> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Extent of Distributed Array Type? > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: <5d76fa7f-e7a8-4d4e-a109-523d7b492...@eecs.utk.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Richard, > > Thanks for identifying this issue and for the short example. I can confirm > your original understanding was right, the upper bound should be identical > on all ranks. I just pushed a patch (r26862), let me know if this fixes > your issue. > > Thanks, > george. > > On Jul 24, 2012, at 17:27 , Richard Shaw wrote: > > > I've been speaking off line to Jonathan Dursi about this problem. And it > does seems to be a bug. > > > > The same problem crops up in a simplified 1d only case (test case > attached). In this instance the specification seems to be comprehensible - > looking at the pdf copy of MPI-2.2 spec, p92-93, the definition of cyclic > gives MPI_LB=0, MPI_UB=gsize*ex. > > > > Test case is creating a data type for an array of 10 doubles, cyclicly > distributed across two processes with a block size of 1. Expected extent is > 10*extent(MPI_DOUBLE) = 80. Results for OpenMPI v 1.4.4: > > > > $ mpirun -np 2 ./testextent1d > > Rank 0, size=40, extent=80, lb=0 > > Rank 1, size=40, extent=88, lb=0 > > > > > > Can anyone else confirm this? > > > > Thanks > > Richard > > > > On Sunday, 15 July, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> I'm getting thoroughly confused trying to work out what is the correct > extent of a block-cyclic distributed array type (created with > MPI_Type_create_darray), and I'm hoping someone can clarify it for me. > >> > >> My expectation is that calling MPI_Get_extent on this type should > return the size of the original, global, array in bytes, whereas > MPI_Type_size gives the size of the local section. This isn't really clear > from the MPI 2.2 spec, but from reading around it sound like that's the > obvious thing to expect. > >> > >> I've attached a minimal C example which tests this behaviour, it > creates a type which views a 10x10 array of doubles, in 3x3 blocks with a > 2x2 process grid. So my expectation is that the extent is > 10*10*sizeof(double) = 800. I've attached the results from running this > below. > >> > >> In practice both versions of OpenMPI (v1.4.4 and v1.6) I've tested > don't give the behaviour I expect. It gives the correct type size on all > processes, but only the rank 0 process gets the expected extent, all the > others get a somewhat higher value. As a comparison IntelMPI (v4.0.3) does > give the expected value for the extent (included below). > >> > >> I'd be very grateful if someone could explain what the extent means for > a darray type? And why it isn't the global array size? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Richard > >> > >> > >> > >> == OpenMPI (v1.4.4 and 1.6) == > >> > >> $ mpirun -np 4 ./testextent > >> Rank 0, size=288, extent=800, lb=0 > >> Rank 1, size=192, extent=824, lb=0 > >> Rank 2, size=192, extent=1040, lb=0 > >> Rank 3, size=128, extent=1064, lb=0 > >> > >> > >> > >> == IntelMPI == > >> > >> $ mpirun -np 4 ./testextent > >> Rank 0, size=288, extent=800, lb=0 > >> Rank 1, size=192, extent=800, lb=0 > >> Rank 2, size=192, extent=800, lb=0 > >> Rank 3, size=128, extent=800, lb=0 > >> > >> Attachments: > >> - testextent.c > > > > <testextent1d.c>_______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > -------------- next part -------------- > HTML attachment scrubbed and removed > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:31:36 -0400 > From: Jeff Squyres <jsquy...@cisco.com> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Extent of Distributed Array Type? > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: <e5dd4476-970f-402a-b526-8e64029f0...@cisco.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Jul 24, 2012, at 6:28 PM, George Bosilca wrote: > > > Thanks for identifying this issue and for the short example. I can > confirm your original understanding was right, the upper bound should be > identical on all ranks. I just pushed a patch (r26862), let me know if this > fixes your issue. > > Note that this patch is on the OMPI SVN trunk. You can either build > directly from an SVN checkout or grab a nightly tarball here (get any r > number >= 26862, obviously, which will be tonight around 10pm US Eastern > time at the earliest): > > http://www.open-mpi.org/nightly/trunk/ > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 19:02:34 -0400 > From: Richard Shaw <jr...@cita.utoronto.ca> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Extent of Distributed Array Type? > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: <f1689c9ee55c49da87e63ffb2a425...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Thanks George, I'm glad it wasn't just me being crazy. I'll try and test > that one soon. > > Cheers, > Richard > > > On Tuesday, 24 July, 2012 at 6:28 PM, George Bosilca wrote: > > > Richard, > > > > Thanks for identifying this issue and for the short example. I can > confirm your original understanding was right, the upper bound should be > identical on all ranks. I just pushed a patch (r26862), let me know if this > fixes your issue. > > > > Thanks, > > george. > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > HTML attachment scrubbed and removed > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:14:20 +0900 > From: tmish...@jcity.maeda.co.jp > Subject: [OMPI users] Mpi_leave_pinned=1 is thread safe? > To: us...@open-mpi.org > Message-ID: > < > of5312e466.cdfdabb2-on49257a46.001a10be-49257a46.001cf...@jcity.maeda.co.jp > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP > > > Dear openmpi developers, > I have been developing our hybrid(MPI+OpenMP) application using openmpi > for five years. > > This time, I tyied to install a new function, which is c++ based multi- > threaded library and it heavily repeats new and delete objects in each > thread. > > Our application is so called "MPI_THREAD_FUNNELED", and openmpi-1.6 > is built using --with-tm --with-openib --disable-ipv6. > > My trouble is that it works very well with "--mca mpi_leave_pinned 0" > but, when mpi_leave_pinned is enabled, it often causes segfault like below. > > I note that it works fine on Windows multi-threaded platform combined > with mpich2. Furthermore, regarding multi-thread(none MPI) version, > it also works fine enven on linux environment. > > #0 0x00002b36f1ab35fa in malloc_consolidate (av=0x2aaab0c00020) > at ./malloc.c:4556 > #1 0x00002b36f1ab34d9 in opal_memory_ptmalloc2_int_free > (av=0x2aaab0c00020, mem=0x2aaab0c00a70) at ./malloc.c:4453 > #2 0x00002b36f1ab1ce2 in opal_memory_ptmalloc2_free (mem=0x2aaab0c00a70) > at ./malloc.c:3511 > #3 0x00002b36f1ab0ca9 in opal_memory_linux_free_hook > (__ptr=0x2aaab0c00a70, caller=0xa075c8) at ./hooks.c:705 > #4 0x00000037b4a758a7 in free () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #5 0x0000000000a075c8 in CErrorReporter<std::basic_ostringstream<char, > std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > > > ::Clear () > #6 0x0000000000a01eec in IPhreeqc::AccumulateLine () > #7 0x0000000000a01180 in AccumulateLine () > #8 0x0000000000a0078e in accumulatelinef_ () > #9 0x0000000000576ce6 in initial_conditions_ () at ./PHREEQC-model.f:307 > #10 0x0000000000577b3a in iphreeqc_main_ () at ./PHREEQC-model.f:505 > #11 0x0000000000577fa1 in basicphreeqc_ () at ./PHREEQC-model.f:944 > #12 0x00000000004b492a in phrqbl_ () at ./MULTI-COM.f:8371 > #13 0x00000000004aa6e9 in smxmknp：ｑois_ () at ./MULTI-COM.f:5112 > #14 0x00000000004a2c5e in solvenpois_ () at ./MULTI-COM.f:4276 > #15 0x000000000049e731 in solducom_ () at ./MULTI-COM.f:3782 > #16 0x000000000048b60c in MAIN () at ./MULTI-COM.f:1208 > #17 0x0000000000481350 in main () > #18 0x00000037b4a1d974 in __libc_start_main () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #19 0x0000000000481259 in _start () > > Best regard, > Tetsuya Mishima > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:55:03 +0000 > From: "Kumar, Sudhir" <k...@chevron.com> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: > < > 8a9547392e2eb443894af275470df5e31a329...@hou150w8xmbx02.hou150.chevrontexaco.net > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi > I have one more related question. Is the F77 bindings available for both > 64bit and 32 bit windows environments or just for the 32 bit environment. > Thanks > > > From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On > Behalf Of Damien > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:11 AM > To: Open MPI Users > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > > Hmmm. 6 months ago there weren't F90 bindings in the Windows version (the > F90 bindings are large and tricky). It's an option you can select when you > compile it yourself, but looking at the one I just did a month ago, there's > still no mpif90.exe built, so I'd say that's still not supported on > Windows. :-( > > Damien > On 18/07/2012 9:00 AM, Kumar, Sudhir wrote: > Hi had meant to say if Fortran90 bindings for Windows > > Sudhir Kumar > > > From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org<mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org> > [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Damien > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 9:56 AM > To: Open MPI Users > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > > Yep. > On 18/07/2012 8:53 AM, Kumar, Sudhir wrote: > Hi > Just wondering if Fortran90 bindings are available for OpemMPI 1.6 > Thanks > > Sudhir Kumar > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org<mailto:us...@open-mpi.org> > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org<mailto:us...@open-mpi.org> > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > -------------- next part -------------- > HTML attachment scrubbed and removed > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:51:32 -0600 > From: Damien <dam...@khubla.com> > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > To: Open MPI Users <us...@open-mpi.org> > Message-ID: <50101604.5030...@khubla.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" > > Sudhir, > > F77 works on both. > > Damien > > > On 25/07/2012 8:55 AM, Kumar, Sudhir wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > I have one more related question. Is the F77 bindings available for > > both 64bit and 32 bit windows environments or just for the 32 bit > > environment. > > > > Thanks > > > > *From:*users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] > > *On Behalf Of *Damien > > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:11 AM > > *To:* Open MPI Users > > *Subject:* Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > > > > Hmmm. 6 months ago there weren't F90 bindings in the Windows version > > (the F90 bindings are large and tricky). It's an option you can > > select when you compile it yourself, but looking at the one I just did > > a month ago, there's still no mpif90.exe built, so I'd say that's > > still not supported on Windows. :-( > > > > Damien > > > > On 18/07/2012 9:00 AM, Kumar, Sudhir wrote: > > > > Hi had meant to say if Fortran90 bindings for Windows > > > > *Sudhir Kumar* > > > > *From:*users-boun...@open-mpi.org > > <mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org> > > [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] *On Behalf Of *Damien > > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 18, 2012 9:56 AM > > *To:* Open MPI Users > > *Subject:* Re: [OMPI users] Fortran90 Bindings > > > > Yep. > > > > On 18/07/2012 8:53 AM, Kumar, Sudhir wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > Just wondering if Fortran90 bindings are available for OpemMPI > 1.6 > > > > Thanks > > > > *Sudhir Kumar* > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > users mailing list > > > > us...@open-mpi.org <mailto:us...@open-mpi.org> > > > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > users mailing list > > > > us...@open-mpi.org <mailto:us...@open-mpi.org> > > > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > us...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > -------------- next part -------------- > HTML attachment scrubbed and removed > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > End of users Digest, Vol 2306, Issue 1 > ************************************** >
